Intel readies 8-core Nehalem-Ex processors for a March launch

Intel's current generation of Xeon processors already represents some of the fastest silicon you can buy, and yet the company's forthcoming Nehalem-Ex-based Xeons are being touted as the single greatest generational jump in its history. To achieve that, Intel has strapped eight cores into each CPU, with a pair of threads per core and 24MB of shared cache, along with integrated quad-channel memory controllers, Turbo Boost, and the pretty awesome ability to scale up to eight sockets -- meaning you could have 64 processing cores in the same rig. Don't even ask whether these chips can run Crysis 2, they'll probably be showing up in the machines that are making the game... and maybe yours, provided you have the cash to splash later this month.

[CaptainPlanet Posted Mar 8th 2010 3:53PM]

So you've said they can't run Crysis 2...but can it run Crysis?

That game looks amazing! Suddenly my 4850 looks like a POS lol

[bazookafx3 Posted Mar 8th 2010 3:59PM]

@CaptainPlanet Now? That game has been out for almost 3 years!
Just kiddin ya.

[paul34 Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:02PM]

@CaptainPlanet

Dude I used to have a lunch box with your face on it!

[Captain Planet Planeteer Power Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:08PM]

@CaptainPlanet

THE HELL IS THIS GUY?

[probex Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:14PM]

@CaptainPlanet Maybe if Crysis runs on a mac pro of the future!

[CaptainPlanet Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:46PM]

yeah....nnnno

[Ericloewe Posted Mar 9th 2010 12:51PM]

@CaptainPlanet
It sure as hell can run Crysis. Heck maybe it can render Crysis 2 in software

[DaHarder Posted Mar 8th 2010 3:56PM]

March Launch...

Isn't It March Now?

[DaHarder Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:00PM]

@DaHarder

... Well then - Let's Do This!

[Nitesh Posted Mar 8th 2010 3:56PM]

Now we are talking! But these do face some stiff competition from the likes of Power7, with the same number of cores but four (FOUR!!!) threads per core, or 32 per chip, 64 per 2-chip module, up to 8 processors in a single system for a whopping 256 concurrent threads all at 3.8GHz, or 4.1 for the quad cores.

[Kira Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:18PM]

@Nitesh

Even POWER6 at 4.7-5GHz is still competitive against Nehalem on benchmarks. Intel has some catching-up to do.

[looselycoupled Posted Mar 9th 2010 4:24AM]

@Nitesh

Power7s are 3-5x the price...

[Marijuana Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:04PM]

Oh shit that's fast

[redspear Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:08PM]

(8 cores per CPU + 8 CPU sockets)* 2 threads per core = 128 virtual CPUs

[Nitesh Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:09PM]

@redspear Only half as many as the Power7 system...They are catching up :-P

[shishi Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:09PM]

"To achieve that, Intel has strapped eight cores into each CPU, with a pair of threads per core and 24MB of shared cache"

Jesus, that's...

Yes, 91,100.

[sshole Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:11PM]

@shishi OVER 9000!

[Samurai Jack Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:15PM]

@sshole Your scouter must be broken if your getting that reading from ChiChi. Oh, it's shishi... nevermind!

[Samurai Jack Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:10PM]

New Mac Pros next Tuesday!

[reallynotnick Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:20PM]

@Samurai Jack
Oh man, a 16 core Mac Pro with 32 threads, this thing will be a beast. Though the real question is will it have a decent graphics card option, I would really hope they have at least an ATI 58xx as a choice.

[looselycoupled Posted Mar 9th 2010 4:26AM]

@reallynotnick
oh not this again... The Mac Pro is a dual socket machine.. Nehalem-EX is for 4+ socket servers...

However, the new 32nm 6-core Westmere chips are a perfect fit...

[rduran Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:13PM]

Wow, I'm imagining a 32-way Mac Pro. Now I know how the Loney Island guys feel.

[xkaosu9x Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:14PM]

the cash to splash? "make it rain" jokes, anyone?

[BrownSound Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:16PM]

have the money to buy this "next month" try next year

[Sean O Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:17PM]

For the first time, I feel like I loser for having an i7 920. And not in that usual "I care about computer chips" kind of loser.

[MikeZ Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:22PM]

*looks towards the task bar to see the Maya icon start drooling*

[applehateboy Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:27PM]

does that mean, i shouldnt buy a macbook pro and wait for the new ones? Or i should buy one cuz they wud b freakin expensive?

[reallynotnick Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:10PM]

@applehateboy
I don't know if I should even reply based on your name but these are DESKTOP processors. But related to your question the Core 2s in the MBPs are outdated and should be updated anytime now.

[Dr Blight Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:25PM]

*begins to kick computer*

Blasted Pentium 4! Why can't you stay competitive!?

[Seanux Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:26PM]

Moments like this that I wish I had unlimited money. Damn you Intel!

[jackleboul Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:28PM]

Well, the only thing missing now is some proper OS and software that would be able to use this power.

Processor technology is so far ahead of any OS and software written for it that it is almost pointless spending this amount of cash. (unless you are trying to project nuclear simulation or missile projectiles)

Running Snow Leopard and Win 7 on my current "old" Mac Pro with only 16 cores it is very difficult to make any software really use all cores consistently.

Final Cut Pro = nope, CS4 = nope, Handbreak = nope, Aperture = nope, LR = nope. All above software together = nope. Why, the weak link here is HD (3X1TB RAID 0) and RAM (16GB) which still slows everything down.

[Nerdtalker Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:49PM]

@jackleboul Buy a SSD or complain to apple about how absolutely poor the scheduler in OS X still is despite continual glowing approval by everyone who doesn't know a thing.

Also, part of it is that writing multithreaded software is just hard. Period.

[dzeikei Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:54PM]

@jackleboul
try SSD RAID0

[jackleboul Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:17PM]

@Nerdtalker
"continual glowing approval by everyone who doesn't know a thing".
Everyone.....I run Win7 on the Mac Pro and on Win PC with equal " relative poor results" and have done so for the last 15 years.

This was not about Mac vs. PC.

RAID 0 on SSD is better for "small" rad and write, but when dealing with large data the performance difference - still noticeable - but not that great vs. 3X1TB RAID 0 HD's. (SATA II limit) The best performing SSD's (intel, OWC and OCZ) are still prohibitively expensive. 2x 200GB SSD costs 1'600 USD.

My point was more the inability to create a better balance between hardware and software. Besides poor scheduling and multitasking, there are issues like memory leaks and other stuff which makes software the Achilles heel of the computer platform. (any platform)

[Bahumbug Posted Mar 9th 2010 3:39AM]

@jackleboul Hate to break it to you but your mac doesnt have 16 cores. It only got 8 cores each with the ability to run two threads - which is not the same as 16 cores.

[Drewoo Posted Mar 8th 2010 4:49PM]

But will it make crysis?

[Branhower Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:02PM]

All at the low low cost of $2,500 per die!

[probex Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:13PM]

Hopefully Apple will grade up their pro rigs to these processors asap. At least there will be some games running on this hardware then, right?!

[Prevacator Posted Mar 8th 2010 5:34PM]

Quad-channel memory? Holy fuck, and I thought the tri-channel on the X58 motherboards were the bees knees. God fucking damn.

[Plazmic Flame Posted Mar 8th 2010 6:45PM]

Quad-core hasn't even become mainstream yet. Thank goodness I didn't upgrade, lol. I'll be jumping from dual-core to octo-core, crazy!

[Ericloewe Posted Mar 9th 2010 12:57PM]

@Plazmic Flame
You won't so soon. This is server-grade, not workstation-grade. Notice the quad-channel memory - it means different socket.

[Jacob1 Posted Mar 8th 2010 6:54PM]

Nehalem-EX is a different socket people, so the next Mac Pro (and its competitors) will only get 6 core processors. The 8 core processors are server-grade.

[Please forgive me Posted Mar 8th 2010 10:16PM]

@Jacob1

Exactly what I was thinkng... which is why it's on the right side of that slide, compared to the 7400 series.

http://www.intel.com/itcenter/products/xeon/7400/

[L3 Chiffr3 Posted Mar 9th 2010 3:43AM]

I haven't even had the pleasure to enjoy i7 ... Damn am late